Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
is to talk about the economy. but i would say something is. romney only emphasized -- very quickly. we cannot run only on an economic message. we have the full conservatives on social issues, on the national security, and on the economy. spent and aspirational. aspirational a mechanism where you are free to go as far as you want to go and to do what you want to do. and you are right about the hispanic community, especially they are very and trunk -- entrepreneurial. guess what. they start liking free government less. >> unfortunately, we're out of time to want to thank you all for coming today. please join me in thanking our panelists for this terrific presentation. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> tonight in primetime we get a closer look at the presidential election. we have from president obama's former campaign manager and republican strategist steve smith. that's and university of delaware and starts at 8 p.m. eastern. here on c-span2, author mark friedman talks about how more baby boomers are entering into a second careers. he's the author of the big shi shift. that's also at 8 p
a share so many in common -- an economy and larger value system. we share security needs and we share security threats. when you have a relationship that close, it cannot help but be good. it has been good. i look for to four more years of working with president obama. >> you just returned from asia. you seem dead like them in a little jet lag. >> president obama is in asia. his first trip when he was elected was here in ottawa. his first trip for his reelection was asia. you both you asia as important both of you are committed to enhancing free trade. you are looking at 50 trade deals. i wanted to ask you -- when our organization was founded 25 years ago, we were founded to be a proponent of free trade. there are not enough voices on either side of the border that point out the benefits. that is why we started it. my observation is that canadians are more open to free trade than americans. their message is of protectionism. what are your observations? what do you attribute the difference to? >> in negotiations on trade agreement -- we are and 50 to go she asians. one is with the euro
that in itself says that when the economy is contracting, there is a competitive advantage to having an education. >> has always struck me with my students. apple would much rather have students with a liberal arts background than a background in computer science or engineering. they are much more adaptable and capable of change. i am not aware of this study, but during the late 1990s, the business higher education forum conducted a study of ceos and see what they sought from college graduates. while they expected some skills, what they were really after was individuals that were committed to continuing having had capacity to continue to learn. not only that they are adapted to change that they can drive change and adapt to an increasingly diverse world. in that sense, it really kind of defines the important part of a liberal education is a background the background for this. the other thing i would mention we really need a liberal arts training before they enter these programs. so i think it really reinforces that. >> i think you are very bright about the data. particularly over the long-term. a
cut down the economy. our friend, not warren buffett but the other guy. a great conversation, ralph nader has been by. years ago -- >> what did he learn from his -- >> did me a favor of not bothering me with his problems which was great that spin too much time trying to make money. >> a useful friends with him? >> i never said anything about him. >> as we go, you have an unusual hobby. you, something unusual. >> i have a collection of backers. also have a collection of airsickness bags. one thing i do ask people who come to the meeting, very helpful if you are traveling, you have an airsickness bag which the free present government afghanistan air sickness bag, so it is a great collection and somebody mentioned years ago in a profile starting in an e-mail, this is -- and odd quirky thing i did. >> what is the mood at the meeting going to be? >> people are very optimistic. people were disappointed because we didn't have the house senate president and then people thought we were going to get the president in the senate and stock didn't go up. we elected a house stronger than the last
think there's a very serious damage done to the economy and to the world economy and the approaches bush took running up to this and that obama is put on steroids. this is in the middle of many problems to continue to not be ended. and the was a very big problem. to be much more serious about spending and it was in that way before. >> how do you fix? >> the house republicans already passed the budget that would work and pass the extension of the tax cuts they would work and you go in and have these conversations in front of the american people without about how romney is mean to dogs and causes cancer and actually talking about issues. and i think that is a debate that we need to have. we haven't had it, certainly didn't have it in this last election and we can have it now. it's very helpful. i think at the end of the day we will make the right decision partially because the democrats are terrified of the damage that obama has to drive them over and they wouldn't actually do that as obama threatened to throw us off a cliff year ago in august and didn't. >> we weren't going to get the neg
as well as our economy. my message was pretty simple. a solution is possible. republicans have been reasonable and president needs to lead. he is the only one who can get us to a solution. if that's what he wants, we'll succeed. so it was with some concern that i read this morning that the president plans to hit the road next week to drum up support for his own personal approach to the short- and long-term fiscal challenges we face. in other words, rather than sitting down with lawmakers of both parties and working out an agreement, he's back on the campaign trail, presumably with the same old talking points that we're all quite familiar with, but we already know the president is a very good campaigner. we congratulate him on his reelection. what we don't know is whether i has the leadership qualities necessary to lead his party to a bipartisan agreement on big issues like we currently face. so let me suggest that if the president wants a solution to the challenges of the moment, the people needs to be talking to are members of his own party so he can convince them of the need to ac
in the economy. republicans couldn't agree more about that, which is why the proposal the president spoke forward to solve the cliff raises taxes on how must a million small businesses who employ 25% of the workforce. ernst & young has been a study that if the president's proposal went into effect to raise taxes on small businesses that they are, they will cost us us over 700,000 jobs, reduced take-home pay by 2% and reduce economic growth by 1.3%. so you've got a lot of analysis out there, lots of economy seem that the president is reposting to do would hurt jobs and the economy, which is again ironic in that the presidentonly solution right now to solve our fiscal cliff issue is to raise taxes. in 2010 we had the same debate. the president said he shouldn't raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy. at that time, economic growth was 2.4%. this year, 2012, the same number is 1.8%. the economy is slower and weaker than it was in 2010 when the president says you shouldn't raise taxes in the middle of a weak economy. we believe the president has got me. it can't be on the people who create jobs i
president obama's deep cuts will have a deep effect to our economy. he used the word dwast stating. snowing this how could anyone support depleting another $1.8 billion from an already stretched budget? president obama's climate chief defended the green fleet by arguing even a dollar rise in gasoline prices would cost d.o.d. $30 billion. believe my good friend, the senator from colorado said essentially the same thing. i agree with that. if every $1 rise in gas prices cost $30 million, a $27 increase would add up to about $660 million so that argument falls completely flat in realizing the economic angle is a political hoozer the obama administration has tried to say it's about national security in getting off of foreign oil. that's where i want to get. i spent several years as chairman of the environment and public works committee and several years as the ranking member. all during that time people keep saying the one thing we all agree on is we need to be off of foreign oil. we need not to be dependent upon the middle east. and yet right now we know and no one is going to refute this fact
to our gross domestic product. money we would have had added to the economy of this country but for our failure to educate these kids. so now where we are is we're in a place where we're playing catch-up with countries that used to crave to be like us. it's so bad now that while our university systems are still where they should be in terms of reputation and attainment, no one really from other countries wants to send their kids over here to go to our k-12 schools. they do that there, and then they say, okay, we'll try to send them to some ivy league school or some good college in the states. and we're at the point now where we need to seriously look at what is it going to take to change that dynamic. well, you know, in recent days we've heard about the teachers' strike, and i think that the big challenge we have is we put ourselves in these partisan boxes, and we force people when we talk about education to take sides. and you know the side that's never adequately represented in these discussions? these kids. so i just posted on my blog, i said, okay, how will a teacher strike in chica
. it is a bill about opportunity for people who enjoy our outdoors in this country. the outdoor economy is some $600 billion, $600 billion a year. i've heard many times spoken on the floor if we're going to get the deficit and debt under control, we've got to grow our economy. this is about growing our economy. how? by allowing to have opportunity for hunters and fishermen for outdoor activists to go out there and utilize the great outdoors this country has to offer. montana and throughout this country. we're losing habitat every day. we have lost access to habitat for hunting and fishing and hiking. this bill will fix that. and i will go back to the point that senator sessions made. when i go back home, folks are talking to me about the debt. they're talking to me about the deficit. they're asking what we can do to fix it. and, quite frankly, this is one of the those things we can do to fix it. by increasing opportunities for our outdoorsmen and women in this country, we have the opportunity to increase our economy in a very, very positive way. like i say, we can talk about the duck stamps. th
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10